will give a full Answer and for which I shall in great part Vid. Mr. Ellis's Treat called Pastor and Clerk Or a Debate real concerning Inant Baptism p. 182 195. be obliged to the Judicious Mr. Ellis 1. I am not obliged to make any return 2. This is a perillous Method of arguing to Religion 3. That it doth not further their Cause 1. I am not obliged to make any return For we may well continue the Custom seeing we have so strong Reasons from holy Writ for it and seeing we have so long enjoyed and used it by so many Instances from the Primitive times as may be proved so that we have Prescription to plead and that Lawyers tells us in some Cases is a good Bar against all other Titles It is upon these Accounts your duty that contradict it to declare any one Instance or Proof that these Reasons and this continued Custom of all times since the holy Apostolick Age should not be continued which I am satisfied they will not be able to perform if they should be so couragious as to undertake it and therefore it will be in vain to make any attempt that way 2. This method of demanding positive Words from Holy Writ for all that Men are to believe or do is extream hazardous to Religion where there is sufficient reason without such an Authority to engage our Faith 1. As to Doctrin it would censure the Method of arguing used by our Blessed Saviour and his Holy Disciples and so make way for a falling from the Truth and giving entrance to the most pernicious Heresies and therefore he that believes such a Doctrin can be no good Christian and possibly for this Reason several have gone from one Sect to another till they came to be of no Religion at all and looking for what is not to be had in Holy Writ nor should be expected from any sort of arguing they have thereupon cast off all 2. As to customary Practices what a door of entrance would there be for strange Doctrins and stranger Practices there is no Command for or Instance of a Woman partaking in the Holy Communion we read not of the baptizing of the Holy Disciples no Command or Instance of one that is not a Clergyman may not have more Wives than one whereupon I have read of one in Essex that married more than one at a time and as it was supposed for that Reason 3. It doth not further their Cause because where there is a good Reason for us to believe or do we are not to stop or stay our belief or defer acting till we have an Instance from Holy Scripture What Command or foreknown Instance had the Holy Apostle of the Circumcision to admit the Centurion of the Italian Band and his Family to Baptism seeing they were not circumcised only that he collected it that because he had a Title to the Covenant by the miraculous Gift of the Holy Ghost he had right to the Sign that conveyed the Priviledge of the Covenant The Commission the Holy Jesus gave to his Blessed Disciples at his leaving the World in relation to the persons is in the Masculine Gender and the Account of St. Peter's baptizing his first Converts was in the same Gender Why then did St. Philip admit to baptism Women as well as Men Acts viij 12 And why do the Antipedobaptists as well as we admit Women to the Communion when there is neither Command nor Rule to enjoyn it To conclude all I shall need to say by way of Exposition upon these three Texts As the Obligatory Power of the Ceremonies and Rites among the Jews was abolished because they did not agree with the ingenuous temper of the Christian Institution so more principally was it taken away as being disagreeable to the Notion of its being an Universal Society for it would have impeded the Propagation of the Religion of the B. Jesus had it been burdened with the Ceremonies and Rites of the Jews which were grown hateful as well as nauseous to the Heathenish part of Mankind and to name no other Instance he was upon this account engaged to alter the Sacrament for Admission into his Church or the Sign of the Old Covenant Circumcision I mean whereby the People of Israel excepting some few Nations as the ancient Egyptians Ethiopians Ishmaclites and Colchians were differenced from the rest of Mankind They were I say Vid. Case of Infant-Baptism pag. 20. grown nauseous and hateful to the World for the use thereof as it is insinuated by several of the Poets as Martial Horace Petronius and Juvenal Is any man called being circumcised let him not become uncircumcised i. e. 1 Cor. vij 18. Let him not use means to attract the Praeputium or Foreskin which the Jewish People were frequently wont to do to shun reproach and to deliver themselves from Persecution in Paganish Kingdoms And upn this account it would have been a great hindrance to the propagation of the New Dispensation should the Heathen World have been admitted to the New Covenant by that way no Sacred Ceremony could be more unacceptable to Mankind in general and hereupon the Wisdom of our Merciful Redeemer as well as New Legislator is to be commended in altering the old antiquated Sign into a more gentle pleasant way of admission by Water which was as of a more universal use so of a more general signification because the Heathen World as well as the People of Israel used it For Heathenism was little else but the Jewish Religion abused by the Prince of Darkness and Father of Lies as Christianity was little more than pure Natural Reason exalted and improved by the King of Light and Purity CHAP. XII A Defence of the Expositions delivered from Jewish Customs AND now that I may engage you to the belief of the sense I have given of these three Texts of Holy Scripture I declare the Account I have offered is according to Jewish Custom and the sense of things well known among them which is the only true and proper way of coming to their right meaning and without such an Exposition or Allusion it is impossible to understand several Phrases and Places in the New Testament Dr. Hammond's Case of Infant-Baptism in his Resolution of six Queries And this may appear from an excellent Account given by the Reverend Dr. Hammond in eight Particulars which I will only mention but not enlarge upon referring you to the Account he gives and then add one memorable Instance to confirm this way of expounding H. Scripture 1. In the calling and receiving Disciples 2. In the Donation of the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven 3. In the Blessed Sacrament of the Lord's H. Supper 4. In Imposition of Hands 5. In the Title of Apostles 6. In the Name and Office of Bishops 7. In the Title of Deacons 8. In the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Church in both Notions of it for the People and the Rulers thereof or Church-Representative
my main Argument and then with this Preface and what is in the Book I shall have delivered what not only my self but others of far greater Judgment if they do not flatter me think necessary to be said on the Subject according to the Method I have handled it in and the Topicks I have proved it by What I said next was when I had occasion to preach on that former Text and quoted 1 Cor. VII 14. I thus delivered my self Give me leave now to say something in defence of Infant-Baptism being willing to seize on any Opportunity that inviteth me to speak thereof For being there is a Sect of Men called Antipaedobaptists that have set up a Meeting in this Parish to seduce Men from the Ancient Truth I think it my Duty out of kindness to your Souls Health to preserve you in the true and Catholic because Christian Doctrin of Baptizing Infants that you may by defending your Orthodox Principle of the Church of England be able to Answer some of their weak though they imagine them strong Arguments If then that be true which I do not in the least doubt having no reason for it that the Learned Rabbins among the Jews acquaint us with who best understood their Usages That one Reason of Circumcision was to teach the derivation of God's Covenant to the Seed of the Faithful This place of St. Paul's will hint us a seemingly unanswerable Argument for Infant-Baptism which with an allowable confidence and without too much conceitedness of my self for I have laboured to mortifie such Inclinations I may challenge the most Learned Antipaedobaptist in this Country or possibly in the Kingdom to give any tolerable Answer to or to offer any Sens of this Text different from what I shall now deliver as its true meaning provided it be according to the Testimony of Holy Writ the Connexion of Sacred Scripture the Analogy of sound Faith and the clear Dictates of right Reason I call this Doctrine an Ancient Practise because I do not in any measure Question but it was used in that Age of Christianity next to the Holy Apostles which is as soon as we could expect it to be used because in the Holy Apostle's time there was no one Nation brought over to the Christian Faith but because of the swift propagation of the Christian Doctrin we may reasonably suppose there was such a Conversion by the end of the first Century or Hundred years after the Holy Apostles death Viri Apostolici and the Fathers of that Century were called Apostolic Men and if you will not allow such a Tradition to be Apostolic I know not what Tradition can claim that Ancient and Honourable Name And now I will give you the plain Sens of that place of St. Paul's above-mentioned such as may confirm what I have before offered as its meaning in a Conference on this Subject For the unbelieving Husband is sanctified by the Wife and the unbelieving Wife is sanctified by the Husband i. e. the Paganish Husband is sanctified by the Wife that is a Christian I mean her Foederal or Covenant Holiness is imputed to the Husband that the Children begotten and born after such a Marriage may be Holy or Partakers of a Foederal or Covenant Holiness For a Personal Holiness cannot be conveyed as some Men of ill Principles particularly the Antinomians think for they believ the Personal Holiness of God and Christ may be transmitted and therefore they declare a Man may be Godded with God and Christed with Christ And so the Paganish Wife is sanctified by the believing Husband That no other sense can be the proper meaning of this Text I appeal to the Context which is the best way to have a right understanding of Holy Scripture or any other Book or Author as will appear by two verses preceding If any Brother hath a Wife that believeth not and she be pleased to dwell with him let him not put her away and the Woman which hath an Husband that believeth not if he be pleased to dwell with her let her not leave him And then the Holy Apostle as an encouragement for Co-habitation and a Reason why the Husband should not Divorce the Wife or the Wife forsake the Husband adds the following Words for the unbelieving Husband is sanctified by the Wife and the unbelieving Wife is sanctified by the Husband which being so great a Priviledg should be a Motive to dwell together and not by separation to forfeit so considerable an Advantage and when there is so plain Sense in Holy Scripture for the Baptizing Infants it is unreasonable in the Antipaedobaptists to demand a positiv Precept of Holy Scripture in express Words and therefore having so much Reason on our side grounded on the plain sense of Holy Scripture Why may not we with as much Reason retort on them and demand a positiv Prohibition in express terms And ask whether they can shew any Text in the whole Sacred Book of God that saith Infants shall not be Baptized Having therefore so much Reason for our Principles we may rationally presume we have the Holy Scriptures seeing they never contradict Reason though they may in some things transcend Reason but I shall need say no more from this Text having spoken so fully to it in the Book to which I referr my Readers I know but one Objection An Obj. I shall need to take notice of here seeing I have answered so many in the Book and in particular This and therefore shall be the shorter in the Account I now give and what I say shall not be the same with that in the Book and this I am the more willing to because I know some of the Antipaedobaptists think it may have some force in it against our Principle though few of them know how to manage it and I confess it hath been started to me by one that knew not how to use it and this they think the stronger because drawn from our acknowledged Principles I mean from one of our authorized Books and so they take it to be like the Logicians Argumentum ad Hominem as strong as a Dilemma and so hope to gore us with our own Horns and expect we should say as the Apostate Emperor of the Christians in his Age when he was overcome by the Christians â—ropriis 〈…〉 with Arguments drawn out of his own Quiver We are wounded with the Arrows feathered from our own Shafts The Objection is drawn from an Answer to a Question in our Church Catechism To that Question What is required of Persons to be Baptized the Answer is Repentance whereby they forsake Sin and Faith whereby they stedfastly believe the Promises of God made to them in that Sacrament To which I Answer the Repentance here spoken of consists in forsaking Sin which is the same with that Abrenunciation they make at their Baptism by their Com-promisers and Undertakers by whom and by certain Conditions promised by their Sponsors and Sureties
Sin and Faith whereby they stedfastly believe the Promises of God made unto them in that Sacrament answ That is for answer hereunto Those that are baptized when adult are indispensably obliged thereunto and Infants when they come to years of discretion and thus our Church Catechism expounds her sense which Promise or Graces Children when they come unto Age are bound to perform It is a good Rule in the Civil Law Nemo tenetur ad Impossibile No Man is obliged unto the performance of that which is impossible to be done by any human power And then we cannot believe that he who is the God of Reason as well as Truth will oblige his Creature to a Duty which he is not able to perform by any Powers he hath created him with and suppose God should infuse into a Child an extraordinary and miraculous measure of Grace as well as Reason as he did into our blessed Saviour and St. John the Baptist who were sanctified from or in the Womb yet we read not tho' they had so great a proportion of the Gifts of the Holy Spirit that during the state of their infancy they magnified God and spake with Tongues antecedent to the use of Speech the manifestation of which Miraculous Power and the discovery of which Divine Gift the Jews at the Feast of Pentecost Acts 2.4 8 11. 10.46 and the first Gentile Converts shewed But to return Tho' these Graces are not needful to all in all circumstances for where there is not a capacity to act them there can be no obligation to their exercise yet that the Children of Believers have a right to the Covenant as soon as born and so have a right to the Seal that conveys the Title and are obliged to its Use if they will enjoy the Priviledges of the Covenant I hope hath been made appear beyond contradiction yet they are needful for some that are admitted unto that Holy Ordinance and this Distinction ought to be well understood and weighed If Baptism be allowed to those who have not the proper Qualifications then those Qualifications are not absolutely needful unto the Undertakers of that Holy Ordinance Faith is sometimes needful when Repentance is not so sometimes Faith and Repentance conjoyned and otherwise sometimes Acts 8.37 When St. Philip admitted the Ethiopian Eunuch to Baptism he only enjoyned Faith 2.41 38. not Repentance St. Peter when he made three thousand Converts at his first Sermon enjoyned Repentance only In short It is as the condition is or the needs of the Party require In Infants the matter is plain as to Repentance the non-performance whereof cannot hinder their being baptized because they having committed no sin are not obliged unto the Duty and yet this is as needful for being baptized as Faith So that this evidences they are not absolutely needful not to all not to Children but only accidentally so and if they may be baptized if they want one why not if they want the other is a Mystery that will not nay I am inclined to believe cannot be discovered by those that because they think the contrary are engaged to make the Revelation Besides I add Actual Faith is needful not to the undertaking but to the subsequent Products of that Holy Ordinance because the first Planters of Christianity admitted some tho' adult to Baptism who had no Faith but were only formal Professors and of this sort were Simon Magus Alexander the Coppersmith Demas and Diotrephes and Judas if baptized and also the Gnostic Hereticks For the Effect is from the Searcher of Hearts who knows our secret thoughts but the External Ordinance may be performed and undertaken by those who know not such Secrets And this is a clear Proof that that Faith which is needful to the product of the Holy Ordinance is not needful to its undertaking and if formal Professors may be partakers of it much more Children if to such as actually impede or hinder the product much rather to them that do not so If it be objected by the Antipedobaptists An Obj. The Church cannot tell but that those that say they have Faith may have it but she certainly knows Children have not I answer answ The Church cannot tell but Hypocrites stop the Product and oppose the Grace of Baptism but she can tell Children do not nor can make hindrance or opposition there is a possibility one may partake of the Grace but the second cannot stop its effects Moreover Children have Faith because they believe in the Holy Jesus St. Matth. 18.6 St. Mark 9.42 as we are told in Sacred Scripture in express words recorded by two Evangelists if one be not enough And that this is a satisfactory and sufficient Proof the Holy Scriptures do assure us when they tell us St. Joh. 8.17 that the Testimony of two Men is true and this witness and evidence it appears we have for the truth of this Doctrin that Children have Faith and that this their Faith was true sound and such as God will accept we may with good reason believe because he that is truth and will not therefore deceive us doth seem so to assure us Vid. pag. 89. as we have already made appear in this Chapter Whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me and therefore fit for his Blessing which is Divine The exercise of our understanding is no more necessary to make us fit for Grace than for Reason but we have seeds of Reason congenite and innate antecedent to the exercise of our understandings otherwise there would be no distinction between a Rational Creature and a Brute when first produced into being and brought to light Sparks and Seeds then of Reason there may be to use the words of the great African Father Per Infantis animan non ubi ratio nulla erat sed ubi adhuc sopita erat St. Aug. Ep 23. ad Bonifac. The Soul of an Infant hath Reason but as yet not capable of use like Fire raked together in the Embers So likewise there is a possibility of Grace being infused by the Divine Spirit as is clear in the fore-quoted Instance of the blessed Jesus and his Praecursor or Fore-runner St. John the Baptist who were sanctified in or from the Womb. Or else they may be said to believe by the Faith of those that present them unto the Holy Ordinance in the Sacred Place Fide gestantium Idem ibidem For to this I may add the Child hath the Faith of the Parent imputed to it and that the Faith of the Parent is imputable to the Child and available for great purposes is apparent because we read in the Holy Gospel That the Blessed Jesus makes the Faith of the Parent necessary unto the Healing of the Child From whence I argue thus That if the Faith of the Parent may be imputed for the recovering of the Bodily Diseases why may not the same be imputed for the curing the Distempers
defence of Infant-Baptism but I was not willing to stuff my Book with Quotations from the Ancients but only thought good to use those that might establish the meaning of these Texts I quoted 9. I have endeavoured to Answer three strong Objections of the Antipaedobaptists against the sens delivered After I had done I shew'd it to some of the Clergy in the Country and I was told by one it had been done in part this way by others I said possibly it might so but I had never seen it in any Book or Author I speak not this to put any value on or assume or take any thing to my self but only to own a Gracious Return to my importunate Prayers while I was employed in the Investigation and Search after Divine Truth and to implore his Blessing that it might have that good effect I sincerely designed in the composure of it Non nobis Domine non nobis sed Nomini tuo sit Gloria And if it shall work a Conviction on any that have erred from the way of Truth I will say in the Words of the Royal Prophet Not unto us O Lord not unto us but unto thy Holy Name be the sole Praise Honour and Glory given and ascribed And indeed it is almost morally impossible for a Wise Man to be Proud if he duly consider what St. Paul saith Who maketh thee to differ from another And what hast thou 2 Cor. IV. 7. that thou didst not receive Now if thou didst receive it Why dost thou Glory as if thou hadst not received it I have so far consulted the satisfaction of the Vulgar Readers that I have placed almost all my Quotations in the Margin except where I had occasion to give an Account of the Original as to St. Matth. XXVIII 19. and Act. II. 39. which I could not well do and if the candid Reader shall skip those two Chapters and what I could not well put into the Margin I hope the unprejudiced Person may receive satisfaction from the rest of the Book And that the meanest Capacity may understand the strength of my Argument and the sens of what I have wrote where I have used any Greek or Latin I have set in the Book and could not place in the Margin I have put it between these two Marks and made the Sens entire without the understanding or reading what is so written Nay some of the Antipaedobaptists are desirous to adorn their Books with the Authorities of Learned Men and to make use of Tradition if it be of their side In truth it is usually seen that hardly any oppose Tradition but those that suppose it is not of their side or cast off Authority but such as believ it against them And I suppose for this Reason Colonel Danvers a great Patron of and Advocate for their Cause and a Principal Head of their Party hath flourished his Book with many Quotations of the Authorities of the Ancients But I doubt not if his Book be examined it will appear he hath either mis-quoted his Authors or mis-represented their Sens and this the Learned Mr. Mr. Walker 's Modest Plea for Infant Baptism Prope finem Walker hath in part already evidenced in the Postscript to his excellent Book and in particular tells us that St. Cyprian's Epistle to Fidus hath not yet been demonstrated to be illegitimate and saith that this Author even Mr. Danvers owns not it is yet made out no not so much as by Monsieur Daillé who hath given the World the greatest discovery of that kind and we have good reason to believ it to be genuine and good ground we have for such a Belief seeing it is allowed by Two Learned Doctors of the Church St. Augustine and St. Hierome as Mr. Walker hath evidenced towards the end of his Book by two Quotations from them to which I referr my Readers And truly I have been told by some of the Learned that some worthy Persons of our excellent Church have challenged the Antipaedobaptists to stand to the Tryal of Antiquity and to appear for their Principles no farther than such Authority will allow but I have heard they have refused to submit to such a Test and pretend they will not be convinced by any other Arguments how strong soever they may not only appear but really be than the plain Words or literal Expressions of Holy Scripture or its direct Sens and the making out the Truth by this way is the hearty Endeavour and sincere Design of this Book and how far it is done according to such a Rule is submitted to the Judgment of the candid and judicious Readers And now on the whole matter I hope I may venture to say if I have given the true sens of Christ's Commission to this Blessed Disciples for the Administration of this Holy Sacrament of Baptism and confirmed it by proper Proofs and answered the strongest Objections brought by the Adversaries against the sens delivered in defence of the Orthodox and Christian Doctrin of Infant-Baptism than he who resists such Evidence renounceth his Belief of the Sacred Scriptures the Revelation of the Holy Will of Heaven and forfeits his Title to the honourable Profession of Christianity And truly the Learned and Judicious Mr. Walker hath given the World such a rational Discours in defence of this Principle in his Modest Plea for Infant Baptism and hath proved by such strong Arguments the Infants Need for it Idem Ibidem In the Title Page Benefits by it Capableness of it and Right to it that whosoever will not believ the comfortable and Christian Doctrin of Infant-Baptism upon the Testimony he bringeth for its proof renounceth his Title to Reason and forfeits his right to the Noble Estate of Humanity and with Nebuchadnezar degenerateth into the Nature of a Beast Dan. IV. 32 33. Nay I think I may without too much boldness say Mr. Walker hath so undeniably proved their Claim and Title to it that in a Spiritual and Evangelic Sens he makes it Sacriledg and in a Temporal and Legal one Robbery to debar them of admission to it all or a great part of which hath been made manifest and apparent consequentially and implicitly from the method we have pitched on and the Arguments we have made use of so that there is no need of borrowing any thing from him he having done it in his way so plainly and fully But they that would have a more particular Account than I have thought fit to give may have plenary and full satisfaction from his excellent Book before-mentioned to which I referr them I have endeavoured to answer all the Objections that I ever heard of or read in any of their Books that were started by the Antipaeaobaptists that were material and I know not any I have passed by unanswered for their difficulty but may have omitted some that were so triffling they either needed not or deserved not any Answer As for that Objection of the Antipadobaptists
An Obj. that our way is not Baptism or Baptizing but Rantism or Rantizing I Answer Answ Though our Church alloweth dipping in some cases and circumstances as supposing the Parents desire it and the Party's health is not in the least endangered and of that there may be much greater hazard in our cold Northern Climate than in those hot Eastern Countries where Baptism was first used and of the Party's health our excellent Church taketh such care in her Rubric that she Orders if it be done at all See the Liturgy in the Office of Publick Baptism it shall be done with great discretion and wariness and not without the Sponsors and Undertakers certifying the Child may with safety endure it but if the Party's health may in the least measure be endangered thereby there cannot by any means be a necessity for it for this good Reason Hos VI. 6. St. Matth. IX 13. XII 7.3.4 St. Luke VI. 4. Levit. XXIV 9. because the God of Heaven will have Mercy and not Sacrifice i.e. The Almighty God and best of Beings dispenseth with his own Institutions in such cases as is plain from the Instance of David eating the Shew-bread when he was well an hungred and they that were with him which was not lawful for him to eat neither for them which were with him because it was lawful for none but the Priest's alone So that for the Reason I have offered the Objection lieth not directly against the Church of England or any that own her Rational because Scriptural Principles yet the Judicious Mr. Walker hath made it demonstrably and therefore unanswerably appear from Divines Grammarians and Lexicographers Vide Mr. Walker 's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Doctrine of Baptisms which whole Book with his Modest Plea for Infant Baptism is very well worthy any Man's perusal that neither the Primitiv Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor the Derivativ Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie only to dip and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not always signifie a total Immersion and that the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not restrained to a total Immersion among Christians by the practise of the Jews Nay farther he hath clearly evidenced that sprinkling was used in the earliest Centuries or first Ages of the Primitiv Church besides he hath given probable Arguments to incline if not engage any unprejudiced Man's Belief that sprinkling was the Custom in the Holy Apostolic times even in those early days when the first commissionated Teachers went forth into the several parts of the World to publish the Sacred Gospel and more than all this he gives great probability of believing See Mr. Walker 's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Doctrine of Baptisms Chap. X. that our ever Blessed Saviour the Holy Jesus when he was Baptized by St. John the Baptist in the River Jordan did not undergo a total Immersion And this I think is abundantly sufficient if not more than enough to Answer if not for ever silence that Objection but they that would have a more ample and larg Account may receiv a full and clear satisfaction from what that excellent Man hath said on that Subject to whom I referr the Readers I know but one Objection that is any thing at all considerable for I would not willingly neglect any that are worth answering I hav not mentioned and that I find started by Mr. Walker in his late excellent Book I have so oft quoted It may be met with in his Preface and because he hath stated it so fairly and answered it so strongly I will give it you in his own Words because I cannot better express it either as to Sens or Words object Because there is no one prejudice holds a stronger possession of our Antipaedobaptists than what springs from that bright Evidence they have of Baptizing Adult Persons in all Ages of the Church and of Persons deferring either to be Baptized themselves or to Baptize their Infants in several Ages of it and those especially that were nearest the Primitiv Times and the removal of that Prejudice and answering that Objection may be a fair Introduction to their depositing and laying down all the rest answ Therefore I will endeavour by way of Conclusion and Answer to remove that and if I can shew the delays of Baptizings which the Antipaedobaptists so greatly insist on in the ancient times were on other Grounds from those they alledg in the Case and plead for a defence of their erroneous and mistaken Principles then that Plea of theirs from the Practice of Baptizing the Adult in the early Ages of the Church and deferring the Baptizing Infants will neither serve their Hypothesis or Principle nor disserve ours The Grounds as I understand on which our Antipaedobaptists refuse Baptizing of their Infants and deferr their Baptism till they come to full Maturity or Ripeness of Age are because as they suppose there is no Command in Holy Scripture for it and because there is no Example in Holy Scripture of its practice either of which if there found our Adversaries would hold it lawful and because they find neither of them they hold it unlawful Now if it appear the Unlawfulness of Baptizing Infants for the want of an Holy Scripture-Command or Example was none of the Grounds on which the Ancients did delay their Baptizings And if it be likewise evident that never any such thing was in the Primitiv Times pretended or pleaded by any Persons to justifie or excuse that delay then I hope the Case will be clear that their delays of Baptizing on other Grounds can afford no Protection to or Defence for the Hypothesis or Principle of our Antipaedobaptists who deny Baptism to Infants on the Account of its Unlawfulness That never any such Plea was made by any in the Primitiv Times even for Five hundred years against Infants being Baptized I rationally presume because I find none yet produced by any of the most learned of our Antipaedobaptists who I believe have searched through all the Writings of the Ancient Fathers and Ecclesiastic Historians and ransacked every Page and rifled every passage in them for some Patronage to their Hypothesis or Principle And as they are quick-sighted enough to have espied it if there had been Quotation or Authority from them to have produced it in their behalf so on the most curious and diligent Enquiry I have been ever able to make I profess I have not been able to find any And then learnedly from Tertullian St. Gregory Nyssen St. Basil St. Gregory Nazianzen and St. Chrysostome he gives Eighteen or Nineteen Instances of several Cases for the deferring of Baptism and afterward brings in three or four other Cases which are all I think could be reckoned up Upon which he saith that I may draw to a Conclusion and now so many Reasons being alledged for the delaying of Baptism so many shifts used for the putting it off in the Primitiv Times and yet the Lawfulness
of its being administred to Infants never once questioned the Unlawfulness of it never urged it is a plain Case that those Times had no such Thoughts of Infant-Baptism as the Antipaedobaptists in our Days entertain For had they thought Baptizing Infants unlawful for want of an Holy Scripture Command or Example when any Persons had been exhorted to an early Baptizing their Children how easie an Answer had been at hand The Holy Jesus never commanded such a thing as Infant-Baptism the Blessed Apostles never practised such a thing as the Baptizing Infants There is neither Precept nor Example in Holy Scripture and therefore it is unlawful and we dare not do it But in regard there is in all those times not the least appearance of any such Objection or of any such Plea pretended for the delay it is evident they thought there was either Precept or Example in Holy Scripture or both or else that the want of either or both did not make it unlawful and so did not delay it on the Account of the Unlawfulness thereof And so all our Antipaedobaptists boasting of Antiquity for the Baptizing only Adult Believing Persons and against the Baptizing Believers Infant-Children affords them little Boast there is not the least strength added to their Cause nor weakness brought on ours I heartily wish those ignorant People that are deluded and cozened with the great Noise and gay Shew of Antiquity to take notice hereof that they be no longer deceived and imposed And now this grand prejudice is as I hope fully removed and all Objections I can imagine any way considerable have been endeavoured to be rationally and clearly answered in the following Book I shall now heartily desire my Readers to join with me in the pious and devout Suffrage of our excellent Liturgy in the Office of the Litany That iâ— may please thee to bring into the way of Truth all such as have erred and are deceived We beseech thee to hear us Good Lord. And now as I begun this large Preface with some of the Sens of a Learned Bishop of our Church in some of his Prefaces to his Books so I will conclude this large Account not only with some of the Sens but in the Words of the same Reverend Bishop I mean the Lord-Bishop of Ely In short then to shut up all if it had not been to fill up some vacant Pages and to be just to the performance of the Promise I made in the Title-Page of giving a Relation so far as my Memory would serve of a Conference publicly held with an Antipaedobaptist of no small Fame I had made almost as short a Preface as those Words of the Son of Syrach according to which I expect the Success of my Labour Ecclus XXI 15. If a skilful Mad hear a wise Word he will commend it and add to it But as soon as one of no Vnderstanding heareth it it displeaseth him and he casteth it behind his Back Examine all things and judge righteous Judgment July 26. 1692. A TABLE OF THE CONTENTS CHAP. I. AN Introduction unto the Subject discoursed upon Pag. 1 CHAP. II. Some Rational Arguments offered for Infant-Baptism Pag. 2 CHAP. III. The tru Sens of the Holy Jesus 's Commission unto his Blessed Disciples for the Administration of Baptism recorded St. Matth XXVIII 19. maketh for the Baptizing of Infants Pag. 4 CHAP. IV. An Exposition whereby the Sens delivered of St. Matth. XXVIII 19. is farther cleared Pag. 12 CHAP. V. The Exposition for clearing the Sens of St. Matth. XXVIII 19. farther enlarged Pag. 26 CHAP. VI. The Sens of St. Matth. XXVIII 19. proved by the Coherance and Connexion of the Words Pag. 38 CHAP. VII The Sens of St. Matth. XXVIII 19. farther evidenced from the Original Pag. 40 CHAP. VIII The Sens of St. Matth. XXVIII 19. confirmed by an Exposition of Acts II. 39. in general Pag. 48 CHAP. IX A farther Confirmation by a particular Exposition of Acts II. 39. Pag. 53 CHAP. X. The Sens of St. Matth. XXVIII 19. strengthened by an Exposition of 1 Cor. VII 14. Pag. 57 CHAP. XI Some General Observations upon the Sens and Expositions given Pag. 62 CHAP. XII A defence of the Expositions delivered from Jewish Customs Pag. 68 CHAP. XIII Authorities of the Ancient Fathers to establish the Sens of the Three Texts of Holy Scripture Pag. 72 CHAP. XIV The just Complaint of the Jews if this Doctrin be not tru Pag. 76 CHAP. XV. An Answer unto an Objection that would overthrow the Sens given of St. Matthew XXVIII 19. Pag. 79 CHAP. XVI An Answer unto an Objection that would undermine the Sens offered for Acts II. 39. Pag. 91 CHAP. XVII An Answer unto an Objection that would overturn the Sens delivered of 1 Cor. VII 14. Pag. 125 CHAP. XVIII An Account whence Infant-Baptism results Pag. 137 CHAP. XIX An Appeal unto the Reason of Mankind Pag. 140 CHAP. XX. The Conclusion Pag. 142 A Prayer used at the end of these Dicourses by way of Humble and Importunate Address unto the God of Truth sitting upon his Throne of Grace his Mercy-Seat the true Scheinah or Symbol of his Divine Presence to implore the Descent of the Heavenly Blessing upon this charitable and well-intended Design Pag. 145 CHAP. I. An Introduction to the Subject discoursed upon SEeing some Men of ill Principles and Separatists from our excellent Church have with an evil design set up a Meeting in this Parish as we may reasonably conjecture without breach of Charity I think it my most indispensible Duty to confirm and settle you in those necessary and fundamental Truths our Church holds by the clear Testimony of Holy Scripture and the evident Dictates of Reason that you may not be seduced into dangerous Errors by weak or cunning Men that lie in wait to deceive I have formerly made appear I hope to the satisfaction of unprejudiced because dis-interested Persons that the Place of Holy Scripture the Enemies of Infant-Baptism so much insist upon and boast of viz. St. Matth. xxviij 19. Go teach all Nations baptizing them is no more against the Comfortable and Christian Doctrine of Infant-Baptism than Gen. 1.1 In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth And now I will endeavour to prove That that Place of Holy Scripture if rightly understood is not only not against us but for us and against them And this I will attempt to evince and make appear by the Evidence of Reason and the Testimony of Divine Revelation CHAP. II. Some Rational Arguments for Infant-Baptism THE Argument I offer in short is plainly this which I will reduce into the form of a plain and proper Syllogism That Principle which hinders the Propagation of Christian Religion can be no Christian Doctrine But the denying Baptism to Infants hinders the Progress of the Christian Religion Therefore such a Principle can be no Christian Doctrine The Major all Christians even our Adversaries allow but the making out the Minor is the Difficulty for which
Covenant of Grace less beneficial and extensive than the Covenant of Works and so consequently doth not allow as great Benefits Priviledges and Immunities to the Covenant of Grace which he doth to the Covenant of Works all which are the dangerous Consequences of Antipedobaptism as I hope I have sufficiently proved and convincingly made out and in the evincing or proving this Argument I have plainly shewed that we have the proper meaning of three Texts of Holy Scripture which I think to any Man of sense is as clear a Proof and as powerful an Evidence to engage our belief to the truth of any Doctrin propounded to us as if we had brought the positive and express Words of Holy Scripture which is as strong a conviction as any Man can with the least shew of reason desire So that if the true sense of the Holy Jesus's Commission to his Blessed Disciples be duly considered and that no other meaning can tolerably be put upon them being backt with the Authority of two other places of Holy Scripture and a threefold Cord is not easily broken no Antipedobaptist that is a Man of sense will hereafter press for a positive and direct place of Holy Writ because he hath no reason to expect a Tautology in Sacred Scripture to please an Humour or serve an Interest and because he will thereby weaken his Cause and then have great reason to be ashamed of if not repent for the Injury he doth his Principles and he will see the vanity of demanding express words for a confutation when he hath plain sense against him for the Holy Scriptures are to be expounded and interpreted by their Sense and not by their Sound by their Spiritual Meaning and not by the bare Words Syllables and Letters for they are best understood by their proper Design and Purport or a true Relation to their Coherence and Connexion with what preceeds and follows after And now give me leave to offer one thing that will confirm the sense of the Texts I have delivered and will also further shew how unreasonable and absurd weak and trifling the Antipedobaptists are for being so peremptory and positive in demanding an express place of Holy Scripture for the baptizing of Infants and this I will endeavour to evince from Customs among the Jews well known to all learned Men. Three things were required by the Jews to make a Male Proselyte of Righteousness Circumcision a kind of Purfication by Water which was an Allusion to Baptism and Oblation which was commonly two Turtles or Pidgeons To a Female Purification by Water and Oblation Now because the Jews since their Dispersion have neither Altar nor Sacrifice they say For the Male Circumcision and Purification by Water are sufficient For the Female Only Purification by Water In David's time they tell us many Thousands were added to the Church without Circumcision by Purification only Hence we may observe that a kind of Admission by Water into the Church was long in use among the Jews tho' it were not Sacramental till the Blessed Jesus's Institution therefore it may seem to be used by them because they looked for it as a Sacrament at the coming of the Messiah as is evident by their coming to St. John the Baptist not so much scrupling his Baptism as his Authority by what Power he baptized St. John i. 25. And they asked him and said unto him Why baptizest thou then if thou be not that Christ nor Elias nor that Prophet By which three different words they meant the Messiah because he was well known to the Jews by those Terms or Phrases to be foresignified so that had he owned himself for such they would not have doubted his Commission but Christ being plainly proved the Messiah he was Lord of the Sacrament as well as of the Sabbath and so had a sufficient Power to institute a New Sacrament and so substituted Baptism in the room of Circumcision which whosoever believes not to be as extensive as the other is so irrational as to make the holy Jesus not so merciful a Legislator as Moses which shews the unreasonableness and absurdity of demanding an express Text of holy Scripture for Infant Baptism which was the Truth to be cleared and I hope is sufficiently made apparent and manifest CHAP. XI Some general Observations upon the Sense and Expositions delivered LET me now offer some general Observations upon the Sense and Expositions of those Texts I have brought for the Proof hereof and I will begin with the Observation of Chemnitius in his Plea he makes against the Antipedobaptists of Germany * Ego sane qui simplicitatem amo etiamsi nec intelligam nec explicare possim quomodo Infantes qui Baptizantur credant judico tamen suffitire firmissima illa testimonia explicata Infantes esse Abaptizandos neque enim ab illis propterea discedendum etsi non possim vel intelligere velexplicare quomedo credant Infames Chemnit Exam. Conc. Trid. part 2. Tit. de Baptismo ad Canon 13. I do so truly love Simplicity and Truth that altho' I cannot tell how Children who are baptized believe yet I judge the Testimonies from Holy Scripture above-named most strong Evidences and a sufficient Proof for this Christian Practice neither ought Christians to depart from this Truth tho' I cannot understand or explain how Children believe In some things we should take St. Paul's Advice And become Fools that we may be wise 1 Cor. iij. 18. Obedience being more acceptable than burnt Offerings 1 Sam. xv 22. And we should offer up our Understandings to divine Revelation where there is clear Reason to submit to it Faith is the wisest and most well-pleasing Service we can offer to God Nescire ea quae docere non vult Magister maximus erudita est inscitia not to know those things our great Master would have us ignorant of is if I may so speak without a Solecism a learned Ignorance But prais'd be Heaven I have yet met with no Arguments of the Adversaries so strong as to need such an Apology or Plea We find not any Accusation laid to the Charge of Christianity by the Jewish or Pagan World upon this Account which certainly would have been done by some of the Enemies of our holy Religion if the Jewish Believer had not enjoyed the same Immunities when Christian that he did before Or if the first Planters of Christianity had preached the same Doctrin the Antipedobaptists do now how would the Enemies of our holy Religion have declamed against us and declared the Doctrin they preached was not the same Covenant God offered to the Father of the Faithful and the People of Israel because that included Father and Son as to the Covenant and the Sign that conveyed the Benefits of the Covenant An Obj. Now because the Antipedobaptists call upon us for an Example of any baptized in a gathered Church without Faith and that herein the holy Scripture is silent Answ To which I
will add two more with the Canon of a Provincial Council and the first of the two I will bring shall be that of the famous Bishop of Carthage St. Cyprian who lived at the end of Origen's time who flourished about fifteen Years after Tertullian what he writes is in that which he sends to his Friend Fidus and in it there is so clear a proof for baptizing Children that it is sufficient to satisfie any person in whom prepossession and Interest do not Rule Fidus had sent to him to acquaint him that he did not think fit that Infants should be admitted unto Baptism before the eighth day as the Jews were under Moses's Dispensation whereupon he sent this Return †Quantum ad causam Infantium pertinet quos dixisti intra secundum vel tertium diem quo nati sunt conllitutos Baptizari non oportere considerandam esse legem Circumcisionis antiquae ut infra octavum diem eum quâ— natus est Baptizandum Sanctificandum non putares longe aliud in Concilio nostro visum est In hoc enim quod to putabas faciendum esse nemo consensit sed universi potius judicamus nulli hominum nato misericordiam Dei gratiam denegandam St Cyprian Ep. 58. ad Fid. That he and the Councel wherein were 66 Bishops were of a different Judgment having declared that as the Lord had no respect of Persons so no regard for Age but that Children might be admitted to Baptism presently after their Birth to cleanse them from their Original Guilt The second shall be from St. Augustin the Reverend Bishop of Hippo which I will the rather do because the Pelagians have been mistakenly supposed by a Consequence from their Doctrin to deny the baptizing of Infants for the Remission of Sins which they that did have been censured by the Church for Hereticks in all Ages as may appear both by St. Ambrose * Hine evacuatio Baptisinatis parvâ—â—orum qâ—â— sola acoâ—tione donarâ— nullo â—â—rem reaâ—â—â—â—cerentur abâ—oâ—vi S. Ambr. Ep. lib. 4. Demâ—tradi Virg. From Pelagius's Doctrin follows the evacuating or making void the baptizing of Infants who would by his Opinion be said to be adopted but not absolved from any guilt And in like manner by the definition of the Councel of Milevis where speaking of the H. Catholic Church's understanding Original Sin we have these words ‖ Propter hanc regulam fidei Parvul qui nihil peccaforum in semetipsis committere poâ—â—erunt deo in peccatorum remissionem veraciter Baptizaâ—â—ur ut in eis regeneratione mâ—ndetur quod generatione trarerunt Conc. Milev Can 2. Upon this Ruse of Faith the sense of the H. Catholic Church ubique semper every-where always it is that Infants are baptized for the remission of sins that what they have contracted by Generation may be purged by Regeneration Now the words of Caelestius as quoted by S. Augustin are these * Infantes Baptizari remissionem peccatorum secundum regulam universalis Ecclesiae Evangelii sententiam S. Aug l. 2. cont Pel. Cael. c. 5. That Infants are baptized for Remission of Sins according to the Rule of the Universal Church and the appointment of the H. Gospel whereby it is probable that he meant this Text of H. Gospel according to the sense we have given of it because none can be admitted into Covenant with the guilt of their sins upon them and to signifie that he must make absolute and sincere renunciation of them which may be one reason why the H. Church appoints Sponsors and Undertakers to make such Promises in the behalf of the Child I will now finish my Proofs from the Testimony of the Ancients by the Authority of a Councel the Provincial Councel of Milevis The Church of Afric was one of the most famous Churches of the Primitive Times for Piety and Learning and the determination of the Council which Case of Infant Baptism p. 152. as St. Augustin observ'd an 100 Years after was not a New Decree Novum Decretum seems to allow baptizing Children in that Church to be a long and uninterrupted Custom This Council was held about the middle of the third Century about 150 Years after the decease of St. John This Councel in its second Canon thus declares It is decreed by the Council i. e. Placuii Spiritui Sancto nobis it is decreed by the H. Ghost and by us †â—â—em placuit ut quicunque parvâ—â—los receates ab uteris matram baptizandos negat aut dicit in remissionem quidem peccatorum baptizari sed nihil ex Adam trahere originalis peccati quod regenerationis lavacro expiâ—â—â—r undo fit Consequens ut in eis form a baptizmatis in remissionem peccatorum non vera sed falsa intelligatur Anathema sit Synod Milevitana Can. 2. apud Carazam That whosoever will not allow Children to be baptized presently after they come out of their Mothers Womb or saith they are baptized for remission of Sins indeed but draw nothing of Original Sin from Adam which is to be explated by the Laver of Regeneration whence it doth follow that that form of Baptism for the remission of Sins in and to you is understood not to be true but false let him be declared Accursed and this I think Proof enough from Antiquity however they that desire more may be excellently satisfied from the learned Mr. Walker's Modest Plea for Infant Baptism where he not only asserts but proves its usage for about fifteen Centuries of years CHAP. XIV The just Complaint of the Jews if this Doctrin be not true AND now what Reason can be offered why those Christians that were converted from Judaism who were scandalized at the omission of Circumcision should not have been more highly scandalized if the first Planters of Christianity had denied an admission of Infants unto Covenant under the H. Gospel Dispensation when they had been ever allowed it under the Mosaic Oeconomy Is it not rational to imagine that they who made so great Complaints only because the H. Disciples instructed the Jewish People that dwelt in Heathen Countries that they were not bound to use Circumcision would not have made greater Complaints if they had not admitted them and their Children unto Baptism but wholly shut them out like the Children of Infidels and not allowed them to be Members of Christ's Mystical Body It certainly in all likelihood would have been a sore Grief to them to observe their Infants used as bad as the Infants of Pagans and Foreigners and to have no clear distinction between such Children whose Parents received the H. Gospel and such as with stood Christianity For they ever esteem'd Heathen Infants as unclean and common but the Infants of Believers they reckoned Holy and Consecrate according to the Exposition we have given of 1 Cor. vij 14. But now had the H. Disciples publicly preached that the Infants of such as were admitted into Covenant with God had no other Title to an
yet this doth not exclude Infants from Baptism as appears from the reason already offered To all this let me add in short what is meant by the Promise as recorded by Joel and cited by the Text and it is double 1. The Pardon of Iniquity 2. The Gift of the Divine Spirit whereby was not always intended a miraculous Gift but the comfort and support of the Divine Spirit in their Souls by his Holy Inspirations and Breathings 1 Cor. xij 29 30. his powerful Aid and Assistance for it is clear by St. Paul the Gift of Miracles was not imparted to some and the Kingdom of God or Grace that good Christians enjoy in this World Rom. xiv â— 6 consists in Righteousness and Peace and Joy in the Holy Ghost and that these very persons had this Communication of the Holy Spirit appears at the latter end of this Chapter for this reason Acts ij 46. Because they did eat their Meat with gladness and singleness of Heart And further Another Communication of the Holy Spirit they had in that they were willing to leave their Possessions and deliver them to be disposed of as the Holy Apostles thought most useful for the good and benefit of the Church iv 34. which were clear and great Testimonies that the Divine Spirit resided and dwelt in their Souls I know a great and learned Man saith he will not defend the Arguments from this Text because he thinks it inconcludent for this reason because he believes the word Children there used is really the Posterity of the Jews and not their Infant-Children And I believe so too And yet with deference to my Superiors and with submission unto better Judgments I take the Argument to be concluding upon this account because it would be a great Incentive to incourage the propagating Christianity and a Motive to both Jews and Gentiles to embrace and come in and own themselves Professors of the Holy Gospel and Disciples of the Blessed Jesus And it is very probable in his first Sermon St. Peter would use the most prevailing Argument with the Jews that he might remove the Prejudice that lay upon their Hearts to hinder them from believing in a crucified Saviour and it is not improbable his numerous Auditors understood him in this sense because we read in the latter part of this Chapter the same day were added to the Church about three thousand Souls Acts ij 41. So that when St. Peter saith the Promise is to you and unto your Children it is as much as if he had said these words O you Jews that now hear me if you will repent and be baptized you and your Posterity and the Children of you and your Posterity if you will repent i. e. own your Guilt in crucifying the Lord of Life and Glory and embrace his Holy Gospel and live according to the Rules thereof and be baptized i. e. receive the Sign of Admission into the New Covenant of Grace you and your Children shall have the same Priviledge you had in your own Dispensation under the Law i. e. your Children shall be in Covenant as well as your selves and equally with you be admitted to the Sign of the Covenant Baptism as your Children are now admitted to Circumcision the Sign of the antiquated Covenant in your way and this might be a great Argument to the Gentiles to become Christians because they should not only enjoy the same Priviledge as the Jew if one of their Proselytes but much greater by being a Disciple of the Blessed Jesus as much greater as the Holy Gospel did exceed the Law as appears by St. Paul's Argument But if the Ministration of Death or the Law written and engraven in Stones was glorious so that the Children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the Face of Moses for the Glory of his Countenace which Glory was to be done away how shall not the Ministration of the Spirit or Gospel be rather glorious For if the Ministration of Condemnation or the Law be Glory much more doth the Ministration of Righteousness or the Gospel exceed in Glory for even that which was made glorious or the Law had no Glory in this respect by reason of the Glory or Gospel that excelleth for if that which was done away or the Law was glorious much more that which remaineth 2 Cor. iij. 7. 12. or the Gospel is glorious Thus I hope I may say without assuming or taking too much to my self I have rescued this Text from the Antipedobaptists Objections and drawn a concluding Argument from it for Infant-Baptism but because the Reverend Dr. Hammond thinks he hath founded the Practice upon a better Basis give me leave to mention it because it will corroborate and confirm what I have said and when I shall have answered the Objections brought against the other place of Holy Scripture I hope I shall for ever silence the Objections of any Antipedobaptist from Holy Writ from having any influence or prevalency on unprejudiced minds that love Truth better than Interest and had rather comply with the Sacred institutions of the Holy Jesus than carry on and promote any Faction against him and his Holy Religion The Argument is this Baptism or Washing was a known Rite solemnly used among the Jews as it is now among Christians for the initiating or entring Jews and Proselytes into the Covenant of the Lord and so into the Congregation of the Jews as among us it is into the New Covenant and into the Church of Christ Many Branches of that Custom there were I shall briefly gather them together and farther testifie the truth of those Affirmations which any way seem questionable to any 1. Baptism or Washing the whole Body was a Jewish Solemnity by which the Native Jews were entred into the Covenant of God made with them by Moses This that learned Doctor makes appear by several Quotations from their great Rabbins and tells us nothing can be more clearly affirmed by them 2. As the Native Jews were thus entred into Covenant by Baptism so the Proselytes of the Jews that were taken in as Profelytes of Justice or Righteousness as professing or undertaking all their Law and not only as Proselytes of the Gate to live among them were received into their Church by Baptism likewise This also the same excellent Doctor proves by several Authorities and Testimonies of their learned Men in all Ages whensoever any Gentile was willing to enter into Covenant and to be gathered under the Wings of the Schecinah or Divine Majesty and to undertake the Yoke of the Law he was bound to have Baptism Circumcision and a Peace-Offering and if it were a Woman Baptism and Sacrifice And again the stranger that is circumcised and not baptized or baptized and not circumcised Arrianus in Epictet l. 2. c. 9. is not a true Proselyte until he be both A clear Testimony we have of this in Arrianus the Stoic Philosopher where the Jewish Proselyte is by him called
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dipped and he that is so only in shew not indeed is termed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a counterfeit baptized Person So that it is observable that the Baptism of the Native Jews was the Pattern by which the Baptism of the Proselytes was regulated and wherein it was founded By all this it appears how little needful it will be to defend the Baptism of Christians from the Law of circumcising Infants among the Jews the Foundation being far more fitly laid in that other of Jewish Baptism a Ceremony of Initiation or Entrance for all especially for Proselytes who were by Water to be cleansed from the Pollutions and Defilements of Heatherism before they were to be admitted into Covenant by the Token thereof Circumcision as well as that of Circumcision and whereas that of Circumcision belonged only to one the other was common to both Sexes and yet from that Example of Circumcision among them thus much must needs be gain'd to our present Design that the Child 's not being able to understand the Vow of Baptism doth no way prejudice the baptizing of such for if it did it must necessarily be an Objection against circumcising the Jewish Child at eight days old who could then no more understand the Covenant of which that was made the Sign nor the Wickedness that the Eutrance into the Covenant obliged to abstain from than the Christian-Infant now can and yet under pain of Excision or cutting off was commanded to be circumcised which being so far vindicated from being unreasonable and incongruous Vid. Dr. Hammond's Resolution of Six Queries whereof Infant-Baptismis one p. 179 181 p. 189 190. by the Example of Circumcision which is alallowed by all Dissenters there will be little ground to fear the Objections from Reason or upon that score to doubt of the Practice of that which is so reasonable when it hath besides this the Example of Baptism among the Jews from which it is immediately deduced so adequately proportionable and directly parallel unto it And here I shall found Christian-Baptism rather than in Circumcision but if any shall overthrow the Argument commonly taken from Circumcision my Return is That it may be made use of by the Rule of Proportion and tho' it may not directly prove yet it clearly illustrates the truth for Argumenta symbolica sunt magis illustrantia quam probativa according to the excellent Lord Bacon's observation such Arguments do rather illustrate than prove Yet it may be reasonably inferred from the Judgment of Heaven in a Case exactly like that such may be admitted in a Sacramental way to be partakers of a Covenant who do not at their admission into it clearly apprehend the terms of it as is evident in the circumcising of the Infant Now against this Account of Circumcision the Antipedobaptists Argument or Objection infers An Obj. and proves nothing As that Types infer nothing unless a Precept attend them answ or the signification of something that hath such a tendency To which I return I do not say Circumcision is a Type of Baptism nor do I infer any thing from it Baptism was substituted instead of Circumcision not as the Antitype comes in the room of the Type but as one established Appointment comes in after a former that is disused and laid aside and this is needful Men should be acquainted with because the Antipedobaptists would weaken the strength of some Reasons which without the allowance of this Hypothesis or Supposition are not easily answered by objecting and affirming An Obj. that the Circumcision used in Abraham's and Moses's days was a Type of the Sacrament used in Holy Gospel-times Now to evidence that the Jewish Sacrament of Admission was not a Tipe of the Holy Gospel one we must by way of Answer observe if we will speak pertinently there was a like distinction between the thing typifying answ and what was typified as between a living person and his resemblance drawn with a Penciâ— that what was substantial in the Antytipe and of a true force virtue and value was usually by way of representation in the Type and did prefigure somewhat which did in an higher and more exalted Sense appertain to the Antitype than to it self Accordingly the Mosaic Offerings that had a tendency to cleanse the outward Man were but weak Representings of the more powerful force and greater value of the Blood of the Holy Jesus the Sacrifice of whose Blood was of such great Efficacy as the Author to the Hebrews tells us that it was able to purge the Conscience from dead Works to serve the living God Heb. ix 14. But it is not thus with the Old and New Sacrament because the former had not such a Resemblance unto the latter nor any thing the same with it which doth not as truly appertain to it as to Baptism Is Baptism an Ordinance of Admission into the New Covenant of Grace in our times So was Circumcision in the days of Abraham and Moses Rom. iv ij Is not Baptism what St. Paul calls Circumcision a Seal of the Righteousness of the Faith So that what Baptism doth now Circumcision did then Circumcision was then a Sacrament as well as Baptism is now the one did as truly admit Members into the Covenant as the other did Moreover if we look back unto the first rise of baptizing as a Mosaic appointment we shall be satisfied Circumcision could not be a Type thereof Because a Type in its genuine Notion is a representation or a prefiguring of somewhat that is to come A Type so far as that word hath a Theological Sense or Divine Acceptation Typas quatenus vox ista sensum habet Theologicum ita definiri posse videtur ut sit futuri aâ—icujus symbolum aut exemplum ita a Deo comparatum ut ipsius plane institutio futurum illud praefiguret quod autem ita praefiguraturillud Antitypus dici solet Outramus de Sacrificijs l. 1. v. 18. may seem thus to be defined That it is a certain representation of something future or a resemblance ordained by God that by his institution and appointment should plainly prefigure something future or to come What is so prefigured is that which is wont to be called the Antitype But baptizing was an institution or appointment under Moses's Dispensation and therefore Circumcision could not be a Type and Representation of it because it was for some Ages administred at the same time therewith I allow Circumcision to be a Divine Institution a Rite of entring Jews and their Infants into Abraham's Covenant And I allow Baptism in this to be the like by a correspondency therewith of entring us into the Holy Gospel-Covenant that it is a Rite of Entrance for the Proselytes of Christians and their Infants into the Covenant of Grace not after the way of Circumcision but the Jewish Baptisms For the making out of which Principle if I had only the proof of the Circumcision of
〈◊〉 without 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which to do without any necessity or reason save only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to serve the opposers turn upon the place and support his false Opinion must needs seem to be very unreasonable 3. This appears most irrefragably by the express words added on this Argument Verse 16. where the unbeliever having been sanctified by the believer used as an Argument why they should live together is farther explained by these words of an undoubted perspicuous sense For what knowest thou O wife whether thou shalt save thy husband Or how knowest thou O husband whether thou shalt save thy wife Where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 save which ordinarily signifies to reduce or as it is 1 St. Pet. iij. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to gain to Repentance from Heathenism or wicked Life is set parallel to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sanctifying and maketh it clear what was meant by it which being once yielded to be the true meaning of the first part there will then be little reason to doubt but that this of the Admission of Christian Children to Baptism on this score is the improvement of the latter part that and no other being it which exactly accords with the former reasoning and it being not imaginable that this should be here added in that argumentative style 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereas or for elsewhere c. if it were not an enforcing of the foregoing Position thus proved by him For the confirming of this sense it may be remembred 1. What 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Holy is known to signifie in the Sacred Dialect not only an inherent but a relative Holiness being separate or set apart to God discriminated from common ordinary things or persons and as that belongs to higher degrees of separation the Office of a Prophet or the like so the lowest degree of it is that of being received to be Members of the Church into which all are initiated or entred by Baptism and accordingly all visible Professors and not only those that are sincerely such are in Ezra ix 2. the Holy Seed and in the Epistles of the Blessed Apostle called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Holy and reasonable it is Children should have an imputed or relative Holiness because they have the Prohibens or Obstacles which kept the Holy Jesus from them or them from the Blessed Jesus I mean Original Guilt taken away with this reserve when they shall be able to perform the Terms of the Covenant they are admitted to as the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vid. Dr. Hammond's Query of Infant-Baptism as Arrianus calls it the Promise of every reasonable Creature when he hath first leave to become such the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Oath consubstantiate with us the Engagement that our Creation ties every Son of Man to is actually required of those only that are of age to practise it but may in the mean time be presumed even in the Womb of the Parent to be undertaken by us this by our being in tended for the use of Reason as Holiness from our being made Proselytes unto the Christian Religion And 2. That the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unclean Acts x. 14. is used by St. Peter for those that must not as he conceiveth be received into the Church as God 's having cleansed is God's reputing them fit to be partakers of that Priviledge whereby it appears how fitly receiving and not receiving them unto Baptism may be expressed by those Phrases 3. It is known of the Jewish legal Uncleannesses contrary to their Sanctifications that they were the cause of removing from the Congregation they that were so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Unclean might not partake of the priviledge of the Temple till they were washed and sanctified and that is proportionable to the Notion here given of it That the Christian Children are Holy i. e. not inherently they are not capable of that but in the Account of God and Man capable of separation for the service of God of being entred into the Church into Covenant which denominates Men Holy as the Gentiles as long as they were out of it were Unclean and Unholy Acts x. Now are they Holy i. e. it is the present practice of the Church that Holy Apostolic Church of St. Paul's time to admit to Baptism such Infant Children of Parents of whom one is Christian though not of others and the ancient Fathers who certainly knew the Sacred Dialect called Baptism Sanctification So St. Cyprian * Eum qui natus est baptizandum sanctificandum S. Cypr. Ep. 59. He that is Born must be baptized and sanctified So St. Gregory Nazienzen †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 St. Greg. Naz. orat 40. It is better to be sanctified without sense of it i. e. baptized in Infancy when they are not sensible of it than to depart or dye without the Seal of Baptism And again ‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 648. Let him be baptized from the Infancy i. e. baptized then and many the like This Passage being thus interpreted is a clear proof of the point in hand Were not this the Import of it there were no Priviledge imaginable no Sanctity could be attributed unto Christians which would not belong to the Infants of Heathens also which yet is here directly affirmed of the one and denied to the other by the Holy Apostle and as this evidently concludeth such a Custom known and acknowledged among Christians at that time so it is directly the thing that the Jewish practice in which Christ founded his Institution hath laid the foundation of in baptizing Proselytes and their Children and to which the primitive Church conformed And so though that Judaic practice taken alone were not deemed any demonstrative evidence that Christ thus instituted his Baptism for the Gentile World yet being taken in conjunction with this Holy Apostolic practice and the primitive usage it brings all the weight with it that a divine Testimony interpreted by practice can afford which is as great as any such matter can be capable of And thus I have sufficiently I hope answered the Objection that would overthrow the true Sense I had before given of this place of St. Paul and offered Reasons so strong and so plain as may satisfie any unprejudiced reasonable Man For Reasons must be plainer than the Matters they are brought to give a Proof of because when we go about to prove a Matter that is questionable we must do it by such Mediums and Methods that are apparent as well as cogent And now from this Text of St. Paul I have made it evidently appear That Children have a right unto the Covenant under the new Dispensation as our Adversaries own and acknowledge they had under the old one and then let the most learned of our Adversaries make appear at what time or when they were excluded and shut out and we will acknowledge and own our selves in a Mistake And if